Royal Babylon

This is an investigative poem about the criminal record of the British Monarchy. Heathcote Williams has devised a form of polemical poetry that is unique, no-holds-barred personal and political. It is a great collection of facts that most people are unaware of.

Can we go on bowing and curtsying to people who are just like ourselves? We begin to wish that the Zoo should be abolished.

That the royal family should be given the run of some wider pasturage – a royal Whipsnade. Will the British Empire survive?

Will Buckingham Palace look as solid in 2034 as it does now? Words are dangerous things remember. A Republic might be brought into being by a poem.

Liked most of it, but the Michael X part. Don't believe in the death penalty, but the activist was definitely not the hero as suggested here. Just because he was an activist doesn't mean he was a saint.

its scary that in the 21th century people like you are still living in a bubble about reality.
I sincerely hope that you wont be part of this world once the people (the real intelligent one, not your stupid kind) will finally take it back from your masters.

British forces liberated Bergen Belsen concentration camp in Germany, yet Philip and Lillibet married in '48 while many, many war crime trials were going on in Europe. His sisters in law were banned from the wedding, all married to SS officers. The hype was how glorious a little Princess married her shining Herr Right. Pedophile Phil met and bedded Lillibet when she was 13... Nary a word was said in protest because inbreds like them have no idea what they're doing wrong.

Does anybody think it is strange if not downright weird that in the Netflix propaganda piece, "The Crown", a rat is seen sniffing cut veggies in the Buckingham Palace kitchen quite clearly...no one else in the scene comments on the beast.

I never read a mention of the TV rat anywhere in any publication or online about the mini series. Like, whaaaaaaaaaaa???

Tom Carberry
- 11/20/2014 at 22:49

A one hour documentary can't come close to documented the historical psychopathy of the British royals, but this film does a pretty good job of giving a general outline.

The history of the little island of England consists primarily of families of psychopaths killing each other off over the centuries until only the most violent and unscrupulous survived. If you like to read about mass murderers and serial killers in very bloody fashion, then read the history of the British royals of any period. From 1381 to 1603 saw the rich sort out some bloodlines, while at the same time slaughtering the poor in great quantities.

It really isn't. At all. Parliament is supreme. The monarchy is just a figurehead. The interest that the British people has for them is similar to that of a celebrity or a soap opera. It sells newspapers. You shouldn't just assume that the small number of monarchists you see on TV represents the whole country. The Queen herself commands a lot of personal respect due to the way she conducts herself, but the monarchy as an institution has little support and is often seen as a bit of a joke. Apathy is the most common British response to its existence.

It has survived because we British know that replacing it would likely lead to mass political conflict about what to replace it with. Nobody wants to open Pandora's Box. Even anti-monarchists fear the results. But somebody has to be an official head of state and no one likes or trusts the government - even those who vote for them. So what do we do?

elizabeth wesley
- 04/08/2014 at 19:26

The toilet doesn't recognize royalty; an a** looks the same no matter who sits down.

because the Queen isn't actually a parasite, she is our top diplomat. that 90 year old woman works damn hard. The Crown protects thousands of acres of countryside, the national parks are all protected by the crown, along with a miriad of other things.

Russ Tul
- 05/13/2015 at 23:21

The fact remains that, compared with the average British subject, the queen and her vast family enjoy immense provileges for no better reason than having been born "with huge silver spoons in their undeserving mouths". The institution of royalty in the civilised world is as outdated as the dodo and a terrible drain on the taxpayer. The money could be put to a much more constructive use, such as providing the homeless with decent housing, abolishing tuition fees, etc.

1concept1
- 05/17/2013 at 13:37

How Ph*k#ng absurd! NO ONE OWNS THE EARTH. i checked out a long time ago and now at seventy i realize that was the best thing that ever happened to me. I too cast a shadow - my sun dial - the moon is my screen saver

Even though this documentary is flawed I'm glad I saw it. Reminds me of UK TV 25 years ago: it was intellectual, edgy, challenging. Not like now.
Incidentally, I've met someone from the Greek royal family who was related to every European house. She seemed incredibly ordinary, not regal or ladylike. I found her attactive, intelligent, unpretentious, shy. I was in an acting class with her and she didn't tell me, nor anyone else she was a Princes. I recognised her in her tiara years later on the internet. She didn't want people to see her as superior. She wanted to feel like an ordinary woman.
Kings and Queens are like us but Republicans miss the point. People want monarchy because we've lost innocence.

East coast people drive me crazy with Eurocentric horse tihs! Get over it an join the "new" world!

Me McMe
- 12/16/2019 at 15:40

Why do you think Britain should "serve" US purposes? We British are extremely grateful for helping us out in the 40s, but we both know the US did it out of its own interests; not those of Britain. And where were you in the first two years when we desperately needed you? By the time you eventually arrived, we'd already rebuilt our armed forces and the Russians were winning on their own. And this was all before we were born so it's not relevant now.

Actually, Britain was second only to the US as a contributor in Iraq and Afghanistan (although I personally never supported those wars). Vietnam was a massive mistake and I'm glad we stayed well away from it. It's the silliest war that the US ever fought and it did untold damage to your prestige in the world.

Ian Thorpe
- 02/25/2013 at 10:17

I thought it was interesting that the Narrator made the following observational statement "The fact that each U.S President's record without exception would earn them seats at the docks of Nuremberg, doesn't prevent the Royal Family from honouring them. But by an ironic twist each President morphs in to George the Third, they declare wars on a whim, they're tyranical plutocrats and they imprison their own people."

This might have a lot to do with the fact that the majority of the U..S presidents have been directly related to the British Monarchy, which is amazing when the diversity of the U.S gene pool is considered. I am British and really enjoyed this film, but a warning to our American cousins... dont believe for a minute that you ceased to have a Monarchy when the british left your shores because as we have found out to our costs, this Family of Inbreds don't and won't just go away.

the Kennedies are the American monarchy; and they're far more evil than Prince Charles.

19thebull
- 09/01/2013 at 00:45

What have the Kennedy's ever done to you?

Russ Tul
- 05/19/2015 at 00:37

They, like all oligarch parasites, have never worked for a living, ergo, they live off the 99.9% percent of us who do.

19thebull
- 05/19/2015 at 13:58

Please define "work"

Russ Tul
- 05/22/2015 at 22:57

Work, as I see it, is the productive process of creating useful things and ideas, i.e., things that help you and me and the rest of humanity move forward -- from the caves our ancestors once lived in to the space stations some of us already live in today and are able to see our planet in the bigger context. This kind of work has no resemblance with the "work" ppl like the British royals (who in my eyes are just perpetual tourists living off the British taxpayer), the banksters and the other 0.01%ers are engaged in, who, instead of contributing to common prosperity and progress, sap the energy of the remaining 99%. Remember the American Revolution, the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution? I wonder what the next revolution will be called.

19thebull
- 05/24/2015 at 15:06

Equal distribution of assets in a society doesn't work, and as far as I know, never has. The 1% that everyone bemoans is needed to grease the wheels of a free economy. With this philosophy comes the downside that you see but it has taken science and industry to heights that only a century ago were undreamed of.

Russ Tul
- 05/24/2015 at 15:49

Your response is a cliché used ad nauseam by all sheeple in their trance-like state of indoctrination. Besides, I was talking about work, not equal distribution, which is an entirely different subject. Pls. don't wait for another response from me, because talking to programmed robots is a waste of time. Now, go back and watch Fox "News".

19thebull
- 05/26/2015 at 16:22

grow up... then we'll talk

a_no_n
- 06/19/2014 at 12:14

wha are the Bushes then?

mostdiggity
- 07/16/2014 at 15:19

Pure evil is my best guess.

mostdiggity
- 07/16/2014 at 15:19

Duh, the Kennedys? They have all being eliminated or marginalized at last check. Who are you... Rip Van Winkle?

ryan
- 09/02/2013 at 07:10

Well, let’s be honest here war crimes are complete joke. Any putz who says that “each US President’s record without exception would earn them seats IN the docks of Nuremberg” obviously does not understand what war entails. it entails killing on an mass scale and in every way conceivable. Only an i*iot would attempt to regulate something so uncontrollable as war and all the physical and emotional power it unleashes.War is chaos and hell smashed together.

I would like for the who blather on about war crimes to explain to us how they can justify differentiating between one form of killing and another. Dead is dead. It really does not matter how you get there. Oh and also explain how laws of war can be equitably applied or even applied at all when there is no independent police force powerful enough to enforce said laws.

That a group of well-meaning fools developed laws(unenforceable I might add) is good for self-righteous proclamations of so and sos “criminality” and for pompous exclamations of one’s moral superiority.( that will never be tested under the crucible of war)

Documentaries like this are fodder for imbeciles and nincompoops who don’t realize that humankind at every level is corrupt, devious, and cruel. The Royal family has nothing on its subjects when it comes to criminality. Where are the documentaries enumerating the sins of the commoners? Oh,wait that would mean potentially angering a target audience. We cannot have that!

Ian Thorpe
- 02/25/2013 at 08:25

thought it was interesting that the Narrator makes the following observational statement "The fact that each U.S President's record without exception would earn them seats at the docks of Nuremberg, doesn't prevent the Royal Family from honouring them. But by an ironic twist each President morphs in to George the Third, they declare wars on a whim, they're tyranical plutocrats and they imprison their own people"

This might have a lot to do with the fact that the majority of the U..S presidents have been directly related to the British Monarchy, which is amazing when the diversity of the gene pool is considered. I am British and really enjoyed this film, but a warning to our American cousins... dont believe for a minute that you stopped having a Monarchy when the british left your shores, as we have found out to our costs this Family of Inbreds don't and won't just go away.

the sex pistols where a bunch of talentless wank£$%^s who took advantage of a liberal and less repressive world to attack those ‘who have’ to make money. Such crap music as well. and probably none of the band members have any ancestors who achieved anything or ran anything. criticism of royals is all about jealousy and envy and envy and it so easy to have a go at the rich.

LMAO. Times change but people don't. Mean people rule the world because running this world makes meanness necessary. Don't forget the Golden Rule now. All this documentary does is reinforce the fact that the vast majority of people are completely powerless, carp about the fact and then let you vent your (our, I'm a disposable work unit too) frustrations. Just be thankful they're OUR bastards because there are always plenty of wannabees lurking in the wings ...

I sat here trying to do this film justice in words then saw devlinwaugh's comment"The dulcet tones and the serious nature of this film is delightful " and it was exactly what I was struggling to say ....Thanks dev !

I believe that Obama, for one, is by nature, a good and kind person in a position of power -- and yet he's quite powerless, because we as sheeple are under the spell of the media (see Edward Bernays on public relations). My suggestion: Switch off your TV set and give your brain a fighting chance.

deldiablo
- 12/23/2012 at 07:28

The sickness of wealth brings out the true nature of people. To allow a few to control the wealth of the nation makes the nation sick. If you allow the young to never know worth and only wealth sickness will follow them all their life. This is why a monarchy will always fail.

Yes Terrence, of course the old bill would be after them. Just as the old bill in the US protect millions over the interests of huge corporations. Just as the old bill allows certain individuals to seize power in West Africa and then watch as they machete those who are weaker. etc. etc. etc.
We are in a world that generally allows the status quo, even it is illegal, because we are made to believe we are benefiting from it and doing anything to disagree is useless.
And Hey! Merry Christmas.

Never mind the BOLLOCK's Here is the SEX PISTOL's.Seems to me a changing of the guard is inevitable and the daily mosh that we see and here everywhere is just another ho hum to many but to put it bluntly .WHAT THE F!!! can we do about it? Stay tuned the NRA is speaking and the posting of the guard in every school will most like fit those who arm their militaries and on duty policeman just fine.It is nothing new that profit from war and enslavement due to anarchy is just what those who say peace in our time mean peace be with you and my army will make sure of that

I believe that line. I believe based on a persons character however, not based on what they look like, where they were born, how much cash they have. I base it on how they are living their life.How much do they contribute? And I like both vases and jugs-Steve assumes the vase is the valuable choice, why? Interesting comment

oQ
- 12/21/2012 at 16:10

Royal Babylon coupled with The Power Principle should be enough to make you pucke on your keyboard so cover it with a platic sheet before pressing enter.
I say to the army, navy and air force: why put your arms down when you can benefit from the bones left behind?
1i

The Queen is so deeply intertwined in the laws of the land that getting rid of her would consume a few years of Parliament's time. Basically this is a window-dressing issue and it comes at a time when we're dealing with fallout from the middle east, an energy crisis, a food crisis, and a whole raft of economic crises. The expense would be enormous - entirely discounting the massive loss of tourism and export business, there's still all the legislature to pass (which costs money), all the titles to be changed (all insignia with "Royal" for example) and so on. Billions upon billions of pounds. Especially considering it can't be done without consent from the Dominions, according to the Statute of Westminster 1931, which means they must be willing to waste time in all their Parliaments to overhaul their own constitutions as well. Unless you want to waste even more time repealing the Statute of Westminster which would be very difficult.

Obviously getting rid of the Queen is just a substitute for actually doing something about real problems which are complicated and which people don't know how to deal with. But a change in window dressing isn't going to address any critical problems.

If you disagree, name for me the crises (not just things you don't like, but actual crises impacting the future of the nation) that getting rid of the Queen will solve.

It reminds me of a distressed mother who responds to the fact her son is a murderer and her husband is a pedophile by proposing that the furniture be rearranged and the family savings be spent on some fancy new curtains.

the riddance would be billed by the families posessions & then send them to hard labour the rest...equalling them to peasants,like the rest of us...oh,that classification would fall away as a bonus!riff-raff to all humankind....socialism coupled with education for all = anarchy (in it's true sense) & peace !

Diane Petterson
- 12/22/2012 at 17:14

Of course by removing the monarchy you remove a mentality, the cronyism and the corruption in the house of lords and in the city of london. If you look at it from a psychological point of view, the British people today do not have a self esteem that is unrelated to the maintenance of the monarchy and to the glorious past. There is no real sense of future, the younger generations, and the general population as well, are soaking their dreams in alcohol (one aspect not shown in the documentary). Overall, the costs of replacing the monarchy are not the real issue, as long as so many countries in the world are changing their regimes. It is an artificial argument used by insecure people which doesn't let the cronies go and which doesn;t let the people wake up to a new life.

Devon Griffiths
- 12/24/2012 at 13:05

Do you think the Queen causes the cronyism and corruption? If that's true, why is it a problem throughout the Western world, including those with republican governments such as the US? I don't think there's one shred of evidence that getting rid of the Queen would do anything to help corruption at all. I think it's rather naieve to think there would be any difference whatsoever.

annieeem
- 12/24/2012 at 20:05

Hi Devon,
I think the Queen is part of a very large system world wide that values money over people. She participates in those things that continue herself as a Queen. She seems maybe a likable woman, but it appears doesn’t really consider those beyond her own world. I don’t think the 99% can ever really understand the impact of growing up as royalty.The responsibility to continue her own power for the next generation is paramount to anything else. I use the fact of her staggering accumulation of wealth. Would it not be enough to have half of it and give the rest directly to those who need it most?
After all, she only has it because she was born to a certain family. Nothing more.
Many very wealthy do give huge sums of money to good causes, many, if you can get to the beginning and ending result for them, do so in their own best interest.I personally believe that this in itself causes cronyism and corruption.It is the system rather than any one person, however it will take each person of wealth to search their own hearts and figure out why they require 3 billion instead of 2. When they can look around at the suffering, the impact of unscrupulous people on millions, and not respond.But, I am not wealthy and I do not have any right to judge them, I just don’t understand.
I have always been fascinated by the fact that Brits so love their Queen, when, I assume, they have to scratch out a living like the rest of us. They seem to be blind to the fact that she lives in luxury with really, no worries, not because she made her money from work, but because she was born special and above others. People BOW to her.
I repeat, people BOW to her.It sickens me.
Please, don’t anyone respond with the old line that the royalty have many things to do and a huge responsibility. Yeah, they do, but it is always so their “reign” continues.Give it up then and do some real good. I think to them that is inconceivable.And, as I have said, millions love them.
OK, I have jumped off my soap box now.Have a great christmas as we celebrate Jesus’ birthday.

Devon Griffiths
- 12/24/2012 at 20:42

OK, so one person that's part of a "very large system" ... and obviously not the largest player by any means ... again, I have to ask, what difference is it really going to make to get rid of her?

I AM POP SLAG.
- 12/26/2012 at 23:53

to have royals is irrational, archaic, genetically poisonous to the population on the whole and in an age of reason its also f****** absurd- you cant evolve culturally if you hang onto such feudalisitc, class based shite and you cant evolve physically if you f*** your sister. thats why devon- or do you enjoy being a subject?

Devon Griffiths
- 12/29/2012 at 14:18

"Evolve culturally"? What does that even mean? Is the US "culturally evolved"? Irrational? It's all irrational, Pop, it doesn't matter if you have a Queen or not. Never mind irrational, the Queen is IRRELEVANT. A powerless symbol and nothing more. There's nothing the true feudal masters of this age like better than getting you to waste your time trying to improve things by dealing with irrelevant symbols.

I AM POP SLAG.
- 12/30/2012 at 13:37

Cultural evolution?- the process by which culture, society and the human psyche evolves?

seriously are you asking me that?
ok
Its basically why it is not considered medically correct to cure everything with leeches anymore and why we can consider religious folk as insane.
Its why its no longer socially acceptable to beat your wife.
Its why we use matches and lighters rather than banging sticks and rocks together...
I could go on but you might want to go read a book first...
The Usa is culturally immature but fairly evolved in the scheme of things- to understand evolution is to understand it as a continuous process- you cannot ever finish evolving-
and by the look of the usas culture it does appear to be devolving somewhat- dumbing down of schools, less freedom daily-
The powers that be dont want a conscious populous capable of change and rational thought- they want malleable workers and soldiers.

The queen is far from an irrelevance -in accepting her presence and paying money to keep her in corgis we are accepting that we are her subjects and thus she has a right to such handouts- like a vastly disproportionate two tier benefit system.
The queen SHOULD be an irrelevance - she should be something consigned to the history books -thing is she aint- she is a symptom of massive group irrationality that promotes a culture of inbreeding, mutant lunatics who are above common law and deserve to be kowtowed to and payed for by ordinary folk just because of their genetic heritage.
Following this exact same eugenicist logic I should be allowed to keep slaves so long as they are genetically inferior to me.

Russ Tul
- 05/19/2015 at 01:26

Well-said Pop Slag

I AM POP SLAG.
- 12/30/2012 at 13:43

I cantr actually believe you just wrote that??? you refer to feudal masters of which the queen is the epitome of- the embodiment of unearned respect and power- the symbol of all that is wrong with the new crop of feudalistic overlords we have allowed installed themselves.
She is an incredibly powerful symbol of how you have no power but if you have wealth and privelege (and white skin of course) you are somehow better than the 99.9% of everyone else.

Russ Tul
- 05/19/2015 at 01:19

Not getting rid of her as a person, but ridding the world of the idea that it's OK to enjoy immense privileges for no better reason than being the offspring of a particular family.

I AM POP SLAG.
- 12/26/2012 at 23:58

No but she is almost an embodiment of the privelege of unjust, unfair and archaic rule of the wealthy- frankly its disgusting and an anathema to the age of reason we find ourselves in.

Greay
- 03/24/2013 at 01:03

To answer your first question...are you naive. Yes the monarchy created cronyism in Britain...without someone abusing power at the top and allowing corruption to rot government, cronyism is not possible. That's why the US is so screwed up now. The elite is a parasitic infection and esp the English royalty. You are a fool to believe that she has nothing to do with the state of the wold to day. GO back to sleep. You sound like an operative of the throne.....

Greay
- 03/24/2013 at 00:57

So what your saying is:
getting rid of the devil is going to be expensive and take some work so we should just ignore her and let her and her demonic minions and relatives destroy planet and continue to enslave humanity because it would too be hard to do anything about it...PATHETIC!!!!
I certainly hope you do not represent the majority of Brits.......

Edmund Holliday
- 04/30/2013 at 07:15

I wouldn't call her a Devil, and frankly I think he does represent the majority of Brits.

Guest
- 04/29/2013 at 09:50

utterly agree with this posting. Look at France...in 1961 police pushed Algerian demonstrators into the Seine, and 10 years ago a Breton terrorist was kept in prison for 2 years without being charged with an offence. Scores of French politicians have been murdered under mysterious circumstances, and inequality and corruption is everywhere. Republic does not mean equality and it avoids looking at real atrocities which we have the power to change.

Edmund Holliday
- 04/29/2013 at 11:02

utterly agree with this posting. Look at France....in 1961 the police pushed pro-Algerian protesters into the Seine. 10 years ago a Breton terrorist leader was kept in jail without charge for 2 years. Scores of French politicians have been murdered mysteriously, and go and live in Paris- inequality everywhere. Republic no way equals freedom, and it detracts from other issues.

Maddestmax
- 12/21/2012 at 13:01

"Having hereditary rulers is like having hereditary mathematicians, it makes no sense" Mark Steel.
ANACHRONISM in the UK.

although if we got rid of all this inequality Mark Steel would have nothing to talk about. Thus he would have to try and be funny.

Mark_Freecortina
- 12/20/2012 at 22:16

Hmmm, probably a halfway reasonable point somewhere in amongst all the drivel, if you could really be arsed, but I couldn't watch more than about 20 minutes. The hunting and game shooting angle was pretty lame and weakened the impact of the documentary in my opinion, but, much as we all love the sex pistols, as soon as the lionising of Michael X started, I switched it off. If that sounds a bit harsh, then google his name along with "Gale Benson".
I have to say, the problem with these half-arsed, tin foil hat fests, aside from being either shoddily researched or just deliberately misinformative, is that they singularly fail to identify the real issue, which is not so much the monarchy, the aristocracy, or a bunch of nude powerbrokers bumming an owl in a wood near San Fransisco, it's quite simply the landowning class and their relationship to government and the tax system. Down with political lobbying, and in with LVT. That'd really hit em all where it hurts :-)

I think it all matters in that it is the common theme of You got money? Then you are special.I thought it a very interesting and informative doc, however like all that interest me, I do further investigation on my own-whoooo, my sat nights are so wild:)
as i am sure many do-it is never a good idea, and actually ignorant, not to look at issues broadly and with a great deal of critical thinking.
I too, believe strongly that allowing lobbying to continue is a huge mistake. and some of those lobbyist benefit me. When I hear the argument for free speech I cringe. More propaganda.

Russ Tul
- 05/19/2015 at 01:46

OK, lobbyism is anathema to democracy, but what would you propose as an alternative? After all, lawmakers have to keep their ear to the ground. I haven't been able to think of a feasible way for lawmakers to keep in thouch with the real world. Maybe there should be something like an altogether independent advisosry body of nonpartisan specialists (e.g. universities) that could advise parliamentarians on (tricky) technical issues. After all, legislators can't be expected to be universal geniuses.

dmxi
- 12/20/2012 at 20:24

highly appreciated.......& (@mods) thanks for re-instating the option of viewing the perpetrators of the 'like' modus)

Low class Americans shoot at schools. I don't see any issues with hunting. We wouldn't be discussing gun laws today if hunting was the only thing Americans did with their guns.

Sieben Stern
- 12/21/2012 at 21:36

i think you miss the point - he was drawing a similarity between their treatment of animals and people - they're a bloody family that delights in killing, killing animals (no one can eat 50 boars or 100,000 birds) and killing people by signing death warrants and glamorizing wars.

he's not being against hunting, he's talking about their stomach for brutality - from the smallest critter to people.

Bad_Conduct
- 12/22/2012 at 20:15

Not really, in Canada (part of the commonwealth), hunting is a major seasonal sport. You could maybe argue the Royal's have a bit to much free time.

Greay
- 03/24/2013 at 01:21

Hunting for food is one thing..hunting for trophies is sick....hunting for trophies on the level of the royals is sadism of the kind that psychopathic serial killers grow up on before they take it to the human public.
Low class Americans.....? hardeehaaarhaar!
Are you royalty or or are you a royal boot licker?
If you are not the former you are low class.